Delhi District Court
Prakarti Rawat (I0(Fir132/2023 /Civil ... vs Pawan Kumar (Without Ins./Dl) on 22 July, 2025
DLCT010127382023
Presented on : 12-09-2023
Registered on : 12-09-2023
Decided on : 22-07-2025
Duration : 01 Year 10 Months
IN THE TRIBUNAL OF PRESIDING OFFICER-MACT-02,
(CENTRAL), TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
PRESIDED OVER BY DR. PANKAJ SHARMA
MACT NO. 810/23
PRAKRITI RAWAT
D/o Sh. Puran Singh Rawat
R/o H.No. C-14 Y2,
C-Block, Dilshad Garden,
Jhilmil, Delhi-110095. .......Petitioner
VERSUS
PAWAN KUMAR
S/o Sh. Subhash Chander
R/o H.No. 142, Village Jainwaas
Bhiwani, Haryana. (Driver-cum-Owner).
.....Respondent
The particulars as per Form-XVII, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) are as under:-
1. Date of the accident 22/03/23
2. Date of filing of Form-I - First Accident Report N.A. (FAR)
3. Date of delivery of Form-II to the victim(s) N.A.
4. Date of receipt of Form-III from the Driver N.A.
5. Date of receipt of Form-IV from the Owner N.A. MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 1/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:22 +0530
6. Date of filing of the Form-V-Interim Accident N.A. Report (IAR)
7. Date of receipt of Form-VIA and Form-VIB N.A. from the Victim(s)
8. Date of filing of Form-VII - Detailed Accident 12/09/23 Report (DAR)
9. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on NA the part of the Investigating Officer? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
10. Date of appointment of the Designated Officer NA by the Insurance Company
11. Whether the Designated Officer of the NA Insurance Company submitted his report within 30 days of the DAR?
12. Whether there was any delay or deficiency on NA the part of the Designated officer of the Insurance Company? If so, whether any action/ direction warranted?
13. Date of response of the petitioner(s) to the offer NA of the Insurance Company.
14. Date of the award 22/07/25
15. Whether the petitioner (s) was/were directed to N.A. open savings bank account(s) near their place of residence?
16. Date of order by which claimant(s) was/were N.A directed to open savings bank account(s) near his place of residence and produce PAN Card and Adhaar Card and the direction to the bank not issue any cheque book/debit card to the claimant(s) and make an endorsement to this effect on the passbook.
17. Date on which the claimant(s) produced the N.A. passbook of their savings bank account near the place of their residence along with the endorsement, PAN Card and Adhaar Card?
18. Permanent Residential Address of the H.No. C-14 MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 2/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:27 +0530 Claimant(s). Y2, C-
Block, Dilshad Garden, Jhilmil Delhi-
110095
19. Whether the claimant(s) savings bank N.A. account(s) is near his place of residence?
20. Whether the claimant(s) were examined at the N.A. time of passing of the award to ascertain his/their financial condition?
AWARD/JUDGMENT FACTUAL POSITION AND PLEADINGS
1. This DAR was filed on 12/09/2023 by the Investigating Officer in the presence of the parties. The DAR is related to a motor vehicular accident dated 22/03/2023 in which one Ms. Prakriti Rawat D/o Sh. Puran Singh Rawat (hereinafter referred to as "petitioner") sustained simple injuries. As per petitioner, on 22/03/2023, she booked an uber ride bearing registration number HR-61C-1644 (hereinafter referred to as "offending vehicle") from her mobile number on the mobile application of the uber from Majnu Ka Tilla towards her destination i.e. Deep Bandhu Hospital, Ashok Vihar. It is further stated that she changed the destination towards C-Block, Dilshad Gardn and requested the respondent to drop her at the updated location i.e. C-Block, Dilshad Garden, Delhi. It is further stated that when she requested the respondent to drop her at the above said updated location at that time the cab was Delhi University MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 3/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:30 +0530 Metro Station and at the request of petitioner, the respondent took a U-Turn and intentionally unlocked the cab. It is further submitted that the respondent was driving the said Cab in a very rash and negligent manner and when she objected to the same he ignored the same and continued driving in the same manner. It is further stated that while the respondent continued to drive in the negligent manner the respondent suddenly made a negligent turn and she got misbalanced and the door of the cab got open and she fell down. It is further stated that after she fell off the cab the respondent with the intention of theft ran away with the belongings of the petitioner i.e. purse miniso black colour hand bag, opp K-10 5G Black colour phone small wallet with cash of Rs. 20,000/- alongwith various documents like Aadhar Card, Debit Card PNB Bank, College ID leaving her lying on the main road to die. It is further stated that she was taken to Sushruta Trauma Centre, Civil Lines and then was taken to Yashoda Hospital, Kaushambi Ghaziabad, UP for further treatment. It is further stated that she was shortlisted for a job and was called for salary negotiations by the Tablot Force Services Pvt. Ltd and due to the said accident she was not able to join and also had to bear monetary losses. It is further stated that she had to incur medical expenses as she was admitted in the hospital. She seeks compensation on account of the injuries sustained by her in the aforesaid accident. An FIR no. 132/23 U/s 279/337/379/411 IPC & 146/196 & 3/181 MV Act PS Civil Lines was registered by the police with respect to above accident. Respondent is stated to be the driver-cum-owner of the offending vehicle. DAR was treated MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 4/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:34 +0530 as a claim petition. Respondent was directed to file his written statement.
2. A written statement was filed by respondent in which he denied the contents of DAR in toto.
ISSUES
3. Vide order dated 06/03/2024 the following issues were framed by this Tribunal :-
1.Whether the petitioner Prakariti suffered injuries in an accident that took place on 22.03.2023 at about 16.35 hrs involving vehicle bearing registration No. HR-61C-1644 driven rashly and negligently and owned by the Respondent No.1?OPP.
2.Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
3. Relief.
EVIDENCE 3.1 The petitioner examined herself as PW-1 in support of her claim. The petitioner filed affidavit Ex. PW1/A wherein she described the occurrence of incident in line with the facts mentioned in Para 1 of this award. She deposed that he sustained injuries at the relevant time. She further deposed that he has spent expenses on her medical treatment. Petitioner has relied upon the following documents:-
''Copy of my Aadhaar Card of PW-1 is Ex. PW-1/1; Copy of FIR is Ex. PW-1/2;
Record of e-mail is Ex. PW-1/3;
MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No.Digitally 5/22signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:42:39 +0530 Media copies where the present matter was highlighted were exhibited as Ex. PW-1/4 but now same are de-exhibited Mark A (colly); Copy of MLC is Ex. PW-1/5;
Medical bills of Yashoda Hospital are Ex. PW-1/6 (colly)'' 3.2 She was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for respondent. In her cross-examined she deposed that she is a post graduate and she has done MBA. She denied the suggestion that the respondent had dropped her at the drop location and left the spot. She further denied the suggestion that he has nothing to do with the accident. She further denied the suggestion that the amount claimed in the heads apart from the medical are exaggerated.
4. PE was then closed.
5. Respondent examined himself as RW1 in his defence.
He deposed vide his affidavit Ex. RW-1/A and relied upon the document i.e. screen shots of Uber Go Taxi which is marked as Mark A. He was cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for petitioner.In his cross-examination he deposed that he was not a regular driver. He further deposed that he was driving the offending vehicle on that day. He further deposed that he was in judicial custody in the present FIR and recovery of the stolen articles was affected from him. He further deposed that his car was seized. He denied that no medical strip of pills was recovered from his car. He denied the suggestion that the MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 6/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:42 +0530 cab was booked from Majnu Ka Tilla tilll Deep Bandhu Hospital, Ashok Vihar initially. He further denied the suggestion that the destination was revised at around Vishwavidhyala Metra Station to C-Blcok Dilshad Garden. He further denied the suggestion that when the petitioner requested him to drop her at the above said updated location, at that time, his car was at Delhi University Metro Station.He further denied the suggestion that his car was intentionally unlocked by him and the life of the petitioner was put in danger. He further denied the suggestion that he was driving in a very rash and negligent manner and further his car's rear door opened and the petitioner fell down on the road and further he left the spot immediately and took away all the belongings of the petitioner.
ARGUMENTS AND FINDINGS
6. Oral submissions were advanced by Ld. Counsel for the parties.
7. I have perused the record and my issue wise findings is as under:-
ISSUE NO.1 ''Whether the petitioner Prakariti suffered injuries in an accident that took place on 22.03.2023 at about 16.35 hrs involving vehicle bearing registration No. HR-61C-1644 driven rashly and negligently and owned by the Respondent No.1?OPP.'' MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 7/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:46 +0530
8. It is well settled that the procedure followed for proceedings conducted by an accident tribunal is similar to that followed by a civil court and in civil matters the facts are required to be established by preponderance of probabilities only and not by strict rules of evidence or beyond reasonable doubts as are required in a criminal prosecution. The burden of proof in a civil case is never as heavy as that is required in a criminal case, but in a claim petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, this burden is infact even lesser than that in a civil case. Reference in this regard can be made to the propositions of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bimla Devi and others Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others, reported in (2009) 13 SC 530, which were reiterated in the subsequent judgment in the case of Parmeshwari Vs. Amir Chand and others 2011 (1) SCR 1096 (Civil Appeal No.1082 of 2011) and also recently in another case Mangla Ram Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 2018 Law Suit (SC) 303.
9. As already discussed above, the father of petitioner examined herself as PW-1 in order to prove the factual averments regarding the occurrence of accident. PW-1 has clearly and categorically stated that at the relevant date, time and place, she booked an uber ride bearing registration number HR-61C-1644 (hereinafter referred to as "offending vehicle") from her mobile number on the mobile application of the uber from Majnu Ka Tilla towards her destination i.e. Deep Bandhu Hospital, Ashok Vihar. It is further stated that she changed the destination towards C-Block, Dilshad Gardn and requested the respondent to drop her at the updated location i.e. C-Block, MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 8/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:42:50 +0530 Dilshad Garden, Delhi. It is further stated that when she requested the respondent to drop her at the above said updated location at that time the cab was Delhi University Metro Station and at the request of petitioner, the respondent took a U-Trun and intentionally unlocked the cab. It is further submitted that the respondent was driving the said Cab in a very rash and negligent manner and when she objected to the same he ignored the same and continued driving in the same manner. It is further stated that while the respondent continued to drive in the negligent manner the respondent suddenly made a negligent turn and she got misbalanced and the door of the cab got open and she fell down. It is further stated that after she fell off the cab the respondent with the intention of theft ran away with the belongings of the petitioner i.e. purse miniso black colour hand bag, opp K-10 5G Black colour phone small wallet with cash of Rs. 20,000/- alongwith various documents like Aadhar Card, Debit Card PNB Bank, College ID leaving her lying on the main road to die. It is further stated that she was taken to Sushruta Trauma Centre, Civil Lines and then was taken to Yashoda Hospital, Kaushambi Ghaziabad, UP for further treatment. It is further stated that she was shortlisted for a job and was called for salary negotiations by the Tablot Force Services Pvt. Ltd and due to the said accident she was not able to join and also had to bear monetary losses. It is further stated that she had to incur medical expenses as she was admitted in the hospital. She seeks compensation on account of the injuries sustained by her in the aforesaid accident. PW-1 was not cross-examined by the Ld. Counsel for respondent. There is nothing on record which betrays any falsity or untruth in the oral testimony of PW-1. As MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 9/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:42:54 +0530 such, it could be safely held that the oral testimony of PW-1 is reliable and trustworthy.
10. In view of the above, it could be safely assumed that at the relevant time, Respondent was driving the offending vehicle in a rash and negligent manner in a high speed while the petitioner was going on motorcycle and hit his motorcycle at the relevant time. In the absence of any averment or evidence regarding any mechanical defect in the offending vehicle or any material depicting any negligent/sudden act or omission on the part of the petitioner, the only inference possible in the given facts and circumstances is that of neglect and default on the part of respondent in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal is constrained to hold respondent guilty of gross negligence and default in driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time.
11. In view of the medical treatment documents placed on record by the petitioner, no dispute is left regarding the nature of injuries sustained by him in the above accident.
12. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal holds that the petitioner suffered grievous injuries on her person on account of negligence and default of respondent while driving the offending vehicle at the relevant time. This issue thus stands decided against the respondents and in favour of the petitioner.
MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 10/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJPANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:42:58 +0530 ISSUE NO. 2 "Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, to what amount and from whom?
13. As the issue no.1 has been proved in affirmative and in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner has become entitled to be compensated for the injuries suffered in the above accident, but the computation of compensation and liability to pay the same are required to be decided.
14. In terms of provisions contained in Section 168 of the MV Act the compensation which is to be awarded by this tribunal is required to be 'just'. In the injury cases a claimant is entitled to two different kinds of compensations i.e. Pecuniary as well as non-pecuniary damages. The "pecuniary damages" or special damages are those damages which are awarded and designed to make good the losses which are capable of being calculated in terms of money and the object of awarding these damages is to indemnify the claimant for the expenses which she had already incurred or is likely to incur in respect of the injuries suffered by her in the accident. The "non-pecuniary" or general damages are those damages which are incapable of being assessed by arithmetical calculations. The pecuniary or special damages generally include the expenses incurred by the claimant towards his treatment, special diet, conveyance, cost of nursing/ attendant, loss of income/earning capacity etc. and the non- pecuniary damages generally include the compensation for the mental or physical shock, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 11/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:43:01 +0530 of life, marriage prospects and disfiguration etc. The above categories falling under both the heads of compensation are not exhaustive in nature but only illustrative. It is also necessary to state here that no amount of money or compensation can put the injured/claimant exactly in the same position or place where she was before the accident and an effort is to be made only to reasonably compensate her or to put her almost in the same place or position where she could have been if the alleged accident had not taken place and this compensation is to be assessed in a fair, reasonable and equitable manner. The object of compensating her is also not to reward her or to make her rich in an unjust manner. It is also well settled that the 'just' compensation to be awarded to the claimant has to be calculated objectively and it may involve some guess work in calculating the different amounts which the claimant may be entitled under the different heads of compensation. Further, in case of permanent disability, the assessment of compensation under the head of loss of future earning, would depend upon the effect and impact of such permanent disability on her earning capacity. Reference in this regard can be made on some of important judgments on the subject like the judgment in the case of R.D. Hattangadi Vs. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1995 SC 755, Arvind Kumar Mishra Vs. New India Assurance Company Limited, (2010) 10 SCC 254 and Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar & Anr., (2011) 1 SCC 343.
15. In light of the above legal propositions, the amount of compensation which can be considered to be 'just' in the opinion of this tribunal shall be as under:-
MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 12/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJPANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:43:04 +0530
(i) Medical or Treatment Expenses
16. The petitioner has placed on judicial file the treatment original medical bills of Yashoda Hospital vide Ex. PW-1/6(colly). As per the said documents, petitioner has incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.38,607/-. However, perusal of record reveals that the entire medical bills have been reimbursed to petitioner by her medi-claim policy and as such nothing is awarded to the petitioner under this head.
(ii) Pain and Suffering
17. As per medical documents, the petitioner has suffered simple injuries It is not possible to quantify the compensation admissible to petitioner for the shock, pain and sufferings etc. which he actually suffered because of the above injuries, but as stated above, an effort has to be made to compensate her for the same in a just and reasonable manner. Hence, keeping in view the extent and nature of the injuries suffered by petitioner and duration of the treatment taken by her etc., an amount of Rs.25,000/- is being awarded to her towards pain and sufferings during the said period of her treatment and immobility. Thus, she is awarded a total amount of Rs.25,000/- under this head.
(iii) Loss of actual earnings
18. The medical documents reflect that the petitioner sustained simple injuries. The above documents are sufficient to uphold the claim of the petitioner to the effect that she was MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 13/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:43:08 +0530 unable to resume her work for about 01 month due to the injuries. As per relevant notification, the minimum wages admissible to an Un-Skilled Person and as on 22/03/2023 in Delhi were Rs.16,792/-. As such, the petitioner is held entitled to a sum of Rs.16,792/- (Rs.16,792/- X 1). The said sum is awarded to the petitioner under this head.
(iv) Conveyance, Attendant Charges and Special Diet & Amenities of life
19. In view of the nature of injuries sustained by the petitioner and the extended period of medical treatment, the petitioner is granted a sum of Rs. 5,000/- each under these heads.
Issue No.3/Relief
20. The petitioner is thus entitled to a sum of Rs.71,988/- ( Rupees Seventy One Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty Eight Only) (Rs. 25,000/- + Rs.16,792/- Rs.5,000/- + Rs. 5,000/- + Rs.5,000/- + Rs.5,000/-) along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the DAR i.e. 12/09/2023. Since no interim compensation has been awarded, therefore no deduction is applicable.
RELEASE
21. Petitioner did not bother to appear before this Tribunal for recording her statement regarding financial needs and requirements.
MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 14/22 Digitally signedPANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:43:13 +0530
22. The petitioner is awarded a sum of Rs.71,988/- (Rupees Seventy One Thousand Nine Hundred and Eighty Eight Only).The entire awarded amount be released in her savings/MACT Claims SB Account as and when she furnishes the details of his bank account which is near the place of her residence to the Bank Manager, State Bank of India, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi under intimation to the Civil Nazir of this Tribunal which can be withdrawn and utilized by the Petitioner.
23. The Bank(s) shall not permit any joint name(s) to be added in the savings bank account or fixed deposit accounts of the petitioner(s) i.e. the savings bank account(s) of the petitioner(s) shall be an individual savings bank account(s) and not a joint account(s). The original fixed deposit shall be retained by the SBI, Branch Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in safe custody. However, the statement containing FDR number, FDR amount, date of maturity and maturity amount shall be furnished by the bank to the petitioner(s). The maturity amounts of the FDR(s) be credit by Electronic Clearing System (ECS) in the savings bank account of the petitioner(s) near the place of their residence. No loan, advance, withdrawal or pre-mature discharge be allowed on the fixed deposits without permission of this Tribunal.
LIABILITY
24. Respondent being the driver-cum-owner is liable to pay the awarded amount to the petitioner and is further directed to deposit the above award amount within 30 days from the date MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 15/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:43:17 +0530 of this Award by way of NEFT or RTGS mode in the account of this Tribunal maintained with SBI, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (account holder's name-Motor Accident Claims Tribunal 02 Central, A/C No. 40743576901, IFSC Code SBIN0000726) under intimation to the petitioner/ injured and this Tribunal in terms of the format for remittance of compensation as provided in Divisional Manager Vs. Rajesh, 2016 SCC Online Mad. 1913 (and reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the orders dated 16.03.2021 and 16.11.2021 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors) along with interest @ 9% per annum till the deposit of the compensation as awarded, failing which he shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the period of delay.
25. A digital copy of this award be forwarded to the parties free of cost. Ahlmad is directed to send the copy of the award to Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate concerned and Delhi Legal Services Authority in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial nos. 39, 40 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A)]. Further Nazir is directed to maintain the record in Form XVIII in view of Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 [(Directions at serial no. 41 of Procedure for Investigation of Motor Vehicle Accidents (under Rule 150A).
26. Ahlmad is directed to e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to the insurer as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 16/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:43:23 +0530 Court of India in WP (Civil) No. 534/2020 titled as Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors. on 16.03.2021. Ahlmad shall also e-mail an authenticated copy of the award to Branch Manager, SBI, Tis Hazari Courts for information.
27. Ahlmad is further directed to comply with the directions passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in MAC APP No. 10/2021 titled as New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sangeeta Vaid & Ors., date of decision : 06.01.2021 regarding digitisation of the records.
File be consigned to Record Room.
A separate file be prepared for compliance report and put Digitally signed up the same on 22.08.2025. PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:43:35 +0530 Announced in the open court (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA) on this 22.07.2025 PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL) DELHI MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 17/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:43:57 +0530 FORM - XVI, Central Motor Vehicles (fifth Amendment) Rules, 2022 (Pl. see Rule 150A) SUMMARY OF THE COMPUTATION OF AWARD AMOUNT IN INJURY CASE
1. Date of accident : 22/03/2023
2. Name of the injured : Prakriti Rawat
3. Age of the injured : 22 years
4. Occupation of the injured : NA
5. Income of the injured : As per minimum wages of an Unskilled Person prevailing in Delhi at the relevant time
6. Nature of injury : Simple
7. Medical treatment taken by injured : Yashoda Hospital
8. Period of Hospitalization : NIL
9. Whether any permanent disability ? If yes, give details : No MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 18/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:44:02 +0530
10. Computation of Compensation S. No. Heads Awarded by the Tribunal
11. Pecuniary Loss (I) Expenditure on treatment NIL
(ii) Expenditure on conveyance Rs.5,000/-
(iii) Expenditure on special diet Rs. 5,000/-
(iv) Cost of nursing/attendant Rs. 5,000/-
(v) Cost of artificial limb NIL (vi) Loss of earning capacity NIL (vii) Loss of Income Rs. 16,792/- MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 19/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:44:05 +0530 (viii) Any other loss which may NIL require any special treatment or aid to the injured for the rest of his life 12. Non-Pecuniary Loss: (i) Compensation for mental NIL and physical shock (ii) Pain and suffering Rs. 25,000/- (iii) Loss of amenities of life Rs.5,000/- (iv) Disfiguration NIL (v) Loss of marriage prospects NIL (vi) Loss of earning, N.A. inconvenience, hardships, disappointment, frustration, mental stress, dejectment and unhappiness in future life etc. MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 20/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:44:09 +0530
13. Disability resulting in loss of earning capacity:
(i) Percentage of disability N.A
assessed and nature of
disability as permanent or
temporary
(ii) Loss of amenities or loss of N.A
expectation of life span on
account of disability
N.A.
(iii) Percentage of loss of
earning capacity in relation
to disability
(iv) Loss of future income - N.A.
(Income x% Earning
Capacity x Multiplier)
14. TOTAL Rs.61,792/-
COMPENSATION
15. INTEREST AWARDED 9% per annum
16. Interest amount up to the Rs.10,196/-( rounded off) date of award MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 21/22 Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2025.07.22 12:44:13 +0530
17. Total amount including Rs.71,988/-
interest
18. Award amount released Entire
19. Award amount kept in As per award FDRs
20. Mode of disbursement of Mentioned in the award the award amount to the claimant(s)
21. Next date for compliance of 22.08.2025 the award.
CONCLUSION:-
1. As per award dated 22.07.2025.
2. A separate file is ordered to be prepared by the Nazir with directions to put up the same on 22.08.2025. Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:44:17 +0530 (DR. PANKAJ SHARMA) PO MACT-02 (CENTRAL) DELHI/22.07.2025 MACT No. 810/23 Prakriti Rawat Vs. Pawan Page No. 22/22 Digitally signed PANKAJ by PANKAJ SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.07.22 12:44:21 +0530